Allowed

Pramod Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Patna HC18 Nov 2019CR. MISC./68224/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted anticipatory bail to three petitioners facing charges under IPC Sections 323, 341, 354(A), 420, and 504/34 related to a land dispute and alleged assault. The court directed them to execute a bail bond and furnish two sureties within four weeks of arrest or surrender.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail upon arrest or surrender within four weeks by furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the same amount.

Pramod Kumar Vs the State of Bihar — Cheque Dishonour | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68224 of 2019

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1077 Year-2017 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Pramod Kumar, Son of Balwan Rai Resident of Village - Madarsa Road, Raja Bazar, P.S.- Shastri Nagar, Distt - Patna.

¶5

Vicky Kumar Son of Veer Prakash Resident of - Mubarakpur, P.S.- Sahpur, Distt - Patna.

¶6

Veer Prakash @ Veer Pratap @ Veer Prakash Singh Son of Ramdhari Prasad Resident of Mubarakpur, P.S.- Sahpur, Distt - Patna.

¶7

... ... Petitioner/s

¶8

Versus

¶9

THE STATE OF BIHAR

¶10

Rinku Devi Wife of Chandra Mohan Prasad Resident of - Nurpur Chandmari, P.S.- Sahpur, Distt - Patna.

¶11

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶12

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amresh Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

2 18-11-2019

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the

¶16

learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶17

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 1077 (C) of 2017, for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 341, 354(A), 420 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

The accusation is that Chandra Mohan Prasad, husband of the complainant/O.P. No.2 used to take liquor and other intoxicated substance and taking advantage of the same,

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68224 of 2019(2) dt.18-11-2019 2/3

¶20

Vicky Kumar (petitioner No.2) and Bir Prasad @ Bir Pratap (petitioner No.3) served liquor and intoxicated substance to Chandra Mohan Prasad, husband of complainant/O.P. No.2, and got executed sale deed regarding 08 katha, 02 dhurs and 08 dhurkee of land in the name of Priynka Kumari, wife of Vicky Kumar (petitioner No.2) and on 26.08.2017 petitioners got executed 3.125 decimals of land in the name of Pinky Kumari, wife of Pramod Kumar (Petitioner No.1) without payment of consideration amount to her husband Chandra Mohan Prasad. When complainant/O.P. No.2 made protest then they assured to give Rs. 20 Lakhs, but they did not pay the same and on making complaint, she was assaulted by them.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that while it is alleged in the compliant petition by the complainant/O.P. No.2 that not a single penny was paid to her husband in respect to consideration amount of the land by the wife of petitioner No.1 and 2, but in her S.A. she had stated that petitioners have paid only Rs. 46 Lakhs and Rs. 20 lakhs is to be paid. Further submission is that, in fact, O.P. No.2 has filed the compliant case only to realize more money from the petitioner by giving the pressure. The petitioners have no criminal antecedent, except, two cases as detailed in paragraph

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68224 of 2019(2) dt.18-11-2019 3/3

¶23

No.3, which are lodged by the complainant/O.P. No.2.

¶24

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the A.C.J.M-V, Danapur in connection with Complaint Case No. 1077 (C) of 2017, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶25

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J)

¶26

manish/-

¶27

U T

Pramod Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod Kumar v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Biplab Sarkar Vs The State of Bihar

Pappu Yadav @ Pappu Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Bala Kumari @ Bala Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Ashok Ray @ Ashok Roy @ Ashok Rai Vs the State of Bihar

Afsana @ Apsana Khtoon Vs the State of Bihar

Shailendra Kumar Vs the State of Bihar